CAPT Crozier
Captain Brett Crozier
Captain Brett Crozier is the former U.S. Navy Commanding Officer of
USS Theodore Roosevelt. He was fired over a letter asking for help with a coronavirus outbreak on the ship. He has tested positive for COVID-19 himself. Crozier’s ouster has been defended by President Trump and military leaders within his administration, but he has been hailed as a hero by others. As he left the aircraft carrier following his removal, hundreds of his sailors chanted his name and applauded before a final salute.
Now he’s getting a second chance.
Defense Secretary Mark Esper Reviewing Whether to Reinstate Captain Crozier
By KRISTINA WONG
Defense Secretary Mark Esper is deciding whether to take the Navy’s recommendation to reinstate Navy Capt. Brett Crozier as the commander of the USS Theodore Roosevelt — the aircraft carrier that was sidelined in Guam with a coronavirus outbreak — after the service concluded its investigation into his actions on Friday.
“This afternoon, Secretary Esper received a verbal update from the acting Secretary of the Navy and the Chief of Naval Operations on the Navy’s preliminary inquiry into the COVID-19 outbreak on the USS Theodore Roosevelt,” said Chief Pentagon Spokesperson Jonathan Rath Hoffman in a statement on Friday.
“After the Secretary receives a written copy of the completed inquiry, he intends to thoroughly review the report and will meet again with Navy leadership to discuss next steps. He remains focused on and committed to restoring the full health of the crew and getting the ship at sea again soon,” he added.
A senior defense official told Breitbart News that Esper wanted to read the Navy’s full investigative report before making any decision. The official said:
The Navy’s inquiry covered a complex timeline of communications between Naval officers, as well as response efforts spanning a dozen time zones and multiple commands. All this information was briefed verbally today in a meeting scheduled for one hour. Given the importance of the topic and the complex nature, the Secretary is going to read the full written report.
Although many in the media are focused on one aspect of the initial inquiry – it is in fact about far more than one person. The Secretary wants to ensure that the report is thorough and can stand up under the rightful scrutiny of Congress, the media, the families and crew of the Theodore Roosevelt, and the American people. To ensure that, he wants to actually read the report.
LC brought this up yesterday; I’ve been hearing the rumblings. This article makes it official; CAPT Crozier’s fate rests with the SECDEF. Stay tuned. Read the rest of the article here: Breitbart
Thanks, LC.
Category: Guest Link, Navy
Instead of reinstating Captain Crozier, I hope the SECDEF forces Crozier to immediately retire in lieu of court martial. Get him out of the Navy now!
I knew plenty of junior and field grade officers with far better situational awareness and operational security than possessed by Crozier. And not one of them ever leaked a official memorandum to a newspaper.
While Crozier enjoys retirement he can engage full time in humble bragging and virtue signaling while writing a book about his COVID-19 experience. Maybe the movie rights will be bought and Tom Hanks can portray Crozier on the silver screen.
Most Field or Company Grade Officers would face separation over a similar OpSec breach. Major Jason Brezler is still fighting for retention after using an unclassified network to warn other Marines about a corrupt Afghan police chief who was a threat to the Marines.
And there was the nuke submariner (E-6) who took some pictures of the Engine Room and spent time in a federal PMITA prison for it.
I can see a future Democrat Presidential candidate right there.
“actually read the report”
That is just unheard of. What is he thinking?
He’ll read the Executive Summary, and go from there.
Say Bye Felicia. Was semi riding a fence on him earlier, waiting on more info. Had commented before that any broadcasting of info that showed the operational status of a bird farm was not a good idea, IMO. Seeing that he is supported by SanFranNan tells me that sailor needs to be beached…forever.
Is the 5 sided puzzle palace eat up with oblowme appointees that are trying to cover his azz?
” any broadcasting of info”
As far as I know he didn’t broadcast anything. What did he broadcast?
Glad to see that someone finally published a statement indicating some concern for the health of the crew. It’s about time.
And, was blown away by the idea that someone would actually read a report.
Still on the fence about what all happened here. Will have to defer to those who have more info. And hope that the “support” of the Speaker doesn’t just makes everything more difficult. Wonder if he even wants her support.
More of barryhusseins team remain.b
With Big Navy’s recent record on getting things wrong, very wrong on just about everything, I’m not about to concede they are right this time when they now are saying they were wrong on the Roosevelt.
I think they’re just flag-fucked-up enough to get even being wrong…well, wrong.
My olfactories are telling me there’s a strong stench of San Fran Nan wafting about Captain Crozier’s continued career. There’s nothing more like a come to Jesus moment for the perfumed princes than getting a flash message from the Speaker of the House.
I’d bet the Poe Plantation on it…
Yeaaaaaah … I’m agnostic on this.
Pelosi’s “support” in this is darn near a kiss of death, IMO, if that, in fact, is going on.
Who he actually emailed, who forwarded what, to who, and who actually leaked to the paper, has been sufficiently muddied up that we may never know.
CPT Crozier may be innocent of leaking to that paper, but SOMEBODY did. Irregardless, going Whiskey Bravo sets a REALLY bad example.
Captain Crozier is Nan’s constituent and his “cause” has been taken up the Dems and media as a way to hurt Trump.
The House controls the Pentagon’s purse strings.
Pelosi controls the House…
…taken up BY the Dems…
PT: last time I checked, both the House and Senate had to approve both authorization and appropriation of Federal funds. When the House and Senate disagree on a particular part of legislation, a common version must be reached and agreed to by both chambers via a new vote before it’s submitted to the POTUS for signature.
So while Pelosi does have some input, she hardly “controls the Pentagon’s purse strings”. If the Senate doesn’t agree with whatever the House wants, no law gets passed.
And she can’t do squat until next budget year anyway – e.g, until October. This fiscal year’s funds are already authorized and appropriated. And even for next fiscal year, without the Senate’s concurrence she can’t do a damn thing except delay passage of DoD’s budget – which is where continuing resolutions come into play.
Hondo, of course both chambers have to reconcile and approve budget bills before sending them to the president.
However, and it’s a big however, as I best recall from my long ago civics classes, all appropriations legislation MUST originate in the House. therefore giving that body the greater political weight in fiscal matters.
https://history.house.gov/institution/origins-development/power-of-the-purse/
Yes, the Senate can suggest and debate but they can’t propose or originate and they can’t vote to approve what never was. Thus when the Speaker growls, the perfumed princes begin to feel faint.
I originally thought something along those lines – e.g., that appropriations legislation must originate in the House. However, the only restriction on where legislation must originate I can find in the Constitution is in Article I, Section 7, Clause 1 (emphasis added):
I’m pretty sure “raising revenue” refers to taxation, not spending. It thus appears to me that both the House and Senate can originate bills that either authorize the spending of Federal funds or formally appropriate funds. In either case, concurrence of the other chamber would of course also be required.
Hondo, the Origination (Revenue) Clause of the Constitution:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Origination_Clause
The Senate can consult, advise, propose but they cannot originate spending legislation. That power resides solely with the House which is one of the reasons the Speaker is both feared and respected (well sorta, in her case) throughout the federal bureaucracy.
If you’re in federal government, there’s no end to the ways that evil woman can rat-fuck your budget, and Big Navy knows it. Can you think of any other reason the Flags would fold their flag without a fight? Even if they were wrong? Doesn’t happen as easily as it is happening in this Crozier case, not in my experience.
Do you honestly think those admirals don’t regard Crozier’s unprofessional performance the same way saner heads here do? Someone brought all that gold braid to heel in record time and who is the most likely suspect with the power to do that?
You might want to read the article you linked in detail, PT.
Bottom line, both from the Constitution and the article you linked: bills regarding taxation must originate in the House. Other bills, including those spending government money, may originate in either chamber; there’s no Constitutional requirement for them to originate in the House.
Per the article you cited, the originally-proposed version of the Constitutional clause included language requiring both taxation and spending legislation to originate in the House. That original version was not adopted; the language requiring appropriations legislation to originate in the House was dropped, and language was added allowing the Senate to propose amendments. This modified language was the language that was adopted as part of the Constitution.
The fact that the language was changed – and that language was included at the same time giving the Senate the authority to propose amendments to any legislation proposed for “raising revenue” (e.g., taxation) – further argues in favor of my contention here. Omissions in the Constitution regarding Federal authority are generally not by accident and are as meaningful as those authorities that are specifically enumerated.
Yes, US appropriations laws traditionally have originated in the House – just like traditionally a supermajority was required for Cloture in the Senate under Senate rules in all circumstances for close to 100 years, changing only recently. But neither is a Constitutional requirement.
And I seem to recall the whole thing starts when the President sends a proposed budget to Congress.
Although those budgets are often DOA.
Hondo, this whole, too-long, too-far-in-the-weeds string started over my comment that the Navy fears Pelosi because of the power of the purse.
Whether or not that fear is a result of constitutional mandates or congressional traditions is meaningless to the extant situation.
They are afraid of that bitch, and rightfully so, and thus backing off on the Crozier thing.
Then Comm Center Rat’s got it right.
Immediate retirement, or charged with Violation of OPSEC, Poor Judgement, Conduct Unbecoming, and anything else they can think of, and let his whiney butt enjoy a General Court.
A link to the email header listing the email addressees.
Have to say that IMO CAPT Crozier needs to call it a career.
It’s an old saying – but a unit’s CO gets held accountable for everything his/her unit does or fails to do. In this case, someone in his unit leaked unmarked classified information to the press.
Whether he did it himself is irrelevant; the moment he saw the letter in unclas format and allowed it to continue being prepared and circulated, he’d fornicated Fido. By allowing it to continue circulating as an unclas document when he knew or should have known it contained classified readiness information about his unit, he’d committed a major security violation.
He may doing it for the best of intentions – or, alternatively, he may have been doing it to perform an “end run” around his chain-of-command. But either way, he’s ultimately responsible for his command’s security breach.
Enough to warrant relief from command? IMO, yes. That kind of security breach simply should not ever happen.
Harsh? Perhaps. But command does come with inherent risks.
” allowed it to continue being prepared and circulated,”
How did he allow it to continue circulating? Once that email was leaked to the press it was out there; only God could have contained it then, and even he would have had to work at it.
The document was prepared, presumably by someone on Crozier’s ship, in draft form before it was printed and signed. It was then apparently sent via unclas email to a number of persons.
The preparation, staffing (if any), printing, scanning, and emailing of the document is what I’m referring to by “circulating” it. All of that happened on Crozier’s ship; at least the emailing (and likely all of the rest) was done on unclas onboard systems.
If Crozier did all of that himself, he’s responsible. If someone in his crew did it for him, he’s still responsible – because he saw what was going on (he signed the memo, remember?) and didn’t put a stop to it.
Processing classified data on unclas systems is a rather serious “no-no”. The same is true for allowing or condoning same.
In WW II times, this would have fallen under “loose lips sink ships”.
I wonder if the Carrier Strike Group Commander, Rear Admiral Stu Baker, was privy to the binnacle list (sick list) that the ship CO sees daily?
This bio of Captain Crozier shows him as being CO of F-18 squadron VFA-94, which deceased blogger Capt. Carroll LeFon (Neptunus Lex) also commanded at one point in his Navy days. Also a bit unusual that Capt. Crozier transitioned from SH-60B helos to F-18s at around the ten year point in his career:
https://www.public.navy.mil/surfor/lcc19/Pages/Bio1-9June2017-16June2018.aspx
Through his untimely actions, Crozier was solely responsible for reducing naval air power readiness in WESTPAC by a third, a serious degradation of power in a time when tensions between the US and China are rising precipitously.
Sorry, but that “If it means saving even one life…” liberal mantra doesn’t mean jack shit (sorry Jack) at that level of national defense.
I couldn’t begin to tell you how many men in my unit went into combat seriously debilitated from one illness or another. Hell, young Poe fought recurring bouts of excruciatingly painful tonsillitis the entire time he was in Vietnam, eating antibiotics like they were candy, until finally getting them removed at an Army hospital in Japan near the end of his tour. The young surgeon said they were the worst he’d ever seen–couldn’t believe I hadn’t been evacuated much sooner.
So puhleeze! I’m just not buying this crap that the admirals think Crozier should be returned to command. They are clearly being very effectively pressured. I hope the Trump admin sees through this BS and stands firm.
“solely responsible for reducing naval air power readiness in WESTPAC by a third”
Sorry, but horseshit. The carrier was already tied up at Guam when he wrote the email, having been ordered to cut short his cruise and proceed there. Any degrading of readiness was caused by the coronavirus, not by Capt. Crozier’s actions.
The “Request for Assistance” linked below should prove useful.
https://news.usni.org/2020/03/31/carrier-roosevelt-co-asks-navy-to-quarantine-entire-crew-ashore-as-covid-19-outbreak-accelerates
It was scheduled for a visit there. The virus caused them to pull in early.
TR had already had one visit to Guam, and I am sure another was scheduled.The exact itinerary I do not know. Your second sentence is the relevant part;
” The virus caused them to pull in early.”
https://www.defenseone.com/threats/2020/04/timeline-battle-uss-theodore-roosevelt/164408/
Trump sycophants turning on another military leader..
Crozier did not commit a breach. Which is why no charges were filed, no reprimand of any sort will be issued, and none ever will be. He should and likely will be reinstated.
He was fired because Trump was embarrassed and lashed out. His obedient little minion tried to please him by firing Crozier.
Patently false, and easily shown to be false. 1. Crozier was the ship’s Captain. He knew (or should have known) that the readiness status of his command was classified information. 2. Crozier signed the memo in question that was leaked to the press. That means he had knowledge of its contents. 3. Crozier thus signed an unmarked document containing classified information (e.g., command readiness data) which he knew or should have known had been prepared and was being circulated outside proper classified distribution channels – and thus among those with no “need to know”. 18 USC 793(f), quoted below, governs (emphasis added): (f) Whoever, being entrusted with or having lawful possession or control of any document, writing, code book, signal book, sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, instrument, appliance, note, or information, relating to the national defense, (1) through gross negligence permits the same to be removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in violation of his trust, or to be lost, stolen, abstracted, or destroyed, or (2) having knowledge that the same has been illegally removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in violation of its trust, or lost, or stolen, abstracted, or destroyed, and fails to make prompt report of such loss, theft, abstraction, or destruction to his superior officer— Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both. The elements are all there. Crozier (1) knew or should have known that readiness info about his ship was classified, (2) willfully signed an unmarked document prepared and circulated on unclassified equipment which in reality contained classified readiness information, (3) failed to take any action on learning the classified information in question was being circulated in improper channels among those with no “need to know”, and (4) failed to report the breach. He’s at best guilty of gross negligence – which does not excuse the violation. Further, Crozier did not have the authority to declassify the information; unit commanders have only derivative classification authority concerning readiness data. So yes: the info in question… Read more »
He also shotgunned 19 copies of the letter to various senior military folks. One or more of them leaked it, and it wound up being published by the San Francisco Chronicle.
I agree with Hondo- The letter amounted to a Unit Status Report (or whatever the Navy calls it), which Crozier knew should be classified.
The Navy completely and totally blew it, starting at the top- which seems to be a pattern with the Navy these days. The president may have chosen his words poorly, but the Acting SecNav flew a few thousand miles, with plenty of time to consider the situation, and still managed to come across like an idiot. This is really Leadership 101 kind of stuff. Anyone in a senior leadership position knows that you praise in public, chastise in private. The public ass chewing over the PA destroyed any morale that may have been left on the TR at that point and basically made it necessary to pull her into port.
The old saying is ‘Mission First, People Always’. It is meant to recognize the fact that you always taking care of your people, because they are how you will accomplish your mission. It does not mean that you can simply abandon your mission to keep your people safe.
Crozier has to go, but the Navy absolutely should not make this a public crucifixion. Someone at the senior level of Navy leadership needs to, you know, lead. I have a feeling that won’t happen, and this will turn into another debacle.
This has far reaching implications. This is not a good time for our sailors to wonder if they have competent leadership, or for our enemies to think our readiness or resolve is weak. Iran is loving this, and so is China
” It does not mean that you can simply abandon your mission ”
So Crozier unilaterally cut short his cruise and docked at Guam? Sorry again, but horseshit.
I didn’t say or even imply that. I said that Crozier knew that making a public statement about the unreadiness of his ship shows that he is not fit to command.
In doing so, he left no options for Navy leadership.
I mentioned the mission first saying because it is commonly misunderstood
But you did. Those were your words I quoted. Why did you write them if they are irrelevant?
“… it is commonly misunderstood”
What is the “it” you refer to? I doubt there is anyone who has been in the military more than a month who does not understand the mission is the primary focus of their existence and takes priority over the interests of the crew. Even if they got a waiver for minimum intelligence.
” outside proper classified distribution channels”
Take a look at the email header linked elsewhere and then tell us why the addressees were not authorized to see such info and were not in the proper distribution channels. Myself, I have no idea what the proper channels are and no idea whether the addressees are in it.
timactual: the letter was sent via unclassified means, but contained classified readiness info concerning Crozier’s command. Specifically, it was sent via UNSECURE e-mail vice secure transmission means. By definition, that is “outside proper distribution channels” for classified info.
Couple that with the fact that it was not marked properly as classified info (e.g., it was completely unmarked), and the letter ended up in the SF Chronicle. By definition, that is a compromise of classified info.
CAPT Crozier may have had the welfare of his crew in mind. Or, alternatively, he might have had the proverbial “hard-on” for his boss and been looking for a way to embarrass him. But either way, it doesn’t matter.
Any way you slice it, he participated in and condoned a mishandling of classified readiness information. That is evidence of incredibly poor judgement, may have aided our adversaries, and is clearly justification for relief from command.
Hmmm, seems like there was a former NY Senator/Sec of State that did about the same thing and got away with it. Is that the defense that the good Captain is using? Seems like, too, that her and her boss, the cool black dude, were responsible for the death and mutilation of an Ambassador and his bodyguards.
“it was sent via UNSECURE e-mail vice secure transmission means”
Being a pre-email type you will have to explain that to me. For one thing, how can you tell the difference?
As to the rest, You are just going to have to hit me in the head with a sledgehammer to convince me that he was totally unjustified and showed terminally bad judgement. So far, I am 55% on his side.
That’s exactly the problem. As the originating authority, Crozier should have known that compiling all of that information with his endorsement and recommendations, with his signature block, was classified, arguably at the SECRET level, but FOUO at a bare minimum. It is called classification by aggregation.
Since he sent it as an unclassified, open email, people who received it downstream didn’t think twice about forwarding it. This is how Hilary Clinton got away with her email fiasco.
That said, the people who saw the letter downstream were all grown-ups, as well. They should have immediately realized that what they were reading should have been FOUO and had the common sense to not forward it and certainly not release it to the press.
I would be interested to know if it was sent via NIPR or SIPR. Although it doesn’t matter in terms of releasing information, a NIPR email would have made it much easier to leak.
Purportedly, an image of the (forwarded) email Crozier sent can be seen here.
If I recall correctly, the last SIPR email system I used some years ago forced the user to enter classification and declas/downgrade instructions when drafting an email. Assuming current Navy SIPR systems do the same, it appears the email was drafted and sent on NIPR.
Dunno if Crozier’s memo was sent as an attachment to that email or not; can’t tell from the linked image. But even without the memo attached the email itself seems problematic in what it reveals about the TR’s readiness condition.
SIPR.
I remember that.
Is it “Old School” these days?
” people who received it downstream didn’t think twice about forwarding it”
That doesn’t say much about the judgement and security awareness of those folks, all O-6 and above, I believe. If Crozier is guilty, so are they if they forwarded it. Guiltier, perhaps.
I do not like what happened to him. I really do not. He seems like a good and consciousness Officer who cares about his crew.
But as the CO, he knew (or should have known) the rules.
That doesn’t excuse the former SECNAV from acting like an idiot.
Bottom line: regardless of how you feel personally, you must conduct yourself in a professional manner. God knows I have been pissed with the chain of command, but I still followed protocol and showed professional conduct.
“That doesn’t excuse the former SECNAV from acting like an idiot.”
From what I have read so far it looks to me like the rest of the CoC is no better.
“, you must conduct yourself in a professional manner.”
That is probably a matter of judgement. From some of the things I have read written by career military folks on this(?) and certainly other sites, a good argument can be made that it was his professional duty to do what he did.
The I hope he enjoys his ETS to Ft. Living Room.
Been giving this some thought, Lars. I’m with the rest who think he should retire. O-6 retirement pay is nothing to sneeze at, and he can pick up work as a contractor or in a think tank easily enough.
If he is re-instated he’ll go exactly nowhere, career-wise. He’ll never screen for Flag. May as well get while the getting is good.
1. Accomplish Mission
2. Take Care of Personnel
That was the standard 36 years ago when I joined the US Army – was it different in the military of whatever country you served in, Commissar?
The fuck he didn’t, dipshit.
Ask any afloat CO what they would have done, the vast majority (>90%) would have shitcanned him, no questions asked.
Or you could just read this, which gives numerous other reasons why he got the boot. Full disclosure: I served with him when he was Engineering Officer on USS Buffalo:
https://www.usni.org/magazines/proceedings/2020/april/command-sea-whats-love-got-do-it
“…because Trump was embarrassed ”
You are seriously deranged. I wager at sundown every evening you curse Trump for extinguishing the sun. You and the Aztecs. Constipation?–Trump did it!
He exercised bad judgement in sending it out via e-mail… no place for it. What he sent out was the equivalent of a SITREP of his command.
Would you send an e-mail to those in your chain-of-command that reported on the status of your unit to do its mission, Lars? Your “hero” fucked up…especially when he had his ISIC (Strike Group Commander) stationed on his ship… he could have gone down the passageway and had a one-on-one conversation about his concerns. If he was unhappy with the Strike Group Commander’s response, then send it out via SECURE comms, not via e-mail.
BTW – the idiot that released it to the press should be canned also.
Not just any SITREP, but that of a deployed unit.
Dunno about now, or how tightly this applied to skimmer pukes, but back in the day, local submarine movements were classified CONFIDENTIAL, and all deployments and movements during deployment were classified SECRET. Occasionally, we’d get interim TS clearances, after which we’d sign Page 13 statements that basically said, “You did do this, you were never there, and if you ever talk about it even to fellow crewmembers about it, many years in federal PMITA prison await.
And that was just after Walker/Whitworth, so nobody doubted they’d fuck you over hard if you ran your suck.
Did do = didn’t do.
Fucking thumbs. Yeah, that’s it.
“could have gone down the passageway and had a one-on-one conversation about his concerns. If he was unhappy with the Strike Group Commander’s response, then send it out via SECURE comms, not via e-mail.”
From what I have read, his immediate commander was part of the perceived problem. There was plenty of traffic, presumably over secure lines, with his entire CoC, including the SECNAV.
To me it all boils down to the question “was he justified?”. In order for me to decide that I am going to need to know exactly what “plans” were made for TR, and the content of all the traffic up and down the CoC. (And the secret of eternal youth, while I am at it).
Crozier showed poor judgment in sending that information in an unclassified letter to so many recipients. He can’t really be trusted in command at this point, and he has little potential for promotion. Command is a privilege, not a right. He needs to retire. I have a feeling that Esper will say something along those lines. That said, the Navy blew this whole thing, and I certainly hope the SecDef is crushing them over this. At a bare minimum they should investigating who leaked it to the press, and their processes for dealing with infectious disease on ships. I think there are a total of 26 warships with corona outbreaks at this point. Congress can make DoD dance in a few different ways. The first and most powerful is the annual National Defense Authorization Act- that’s where all the money is laid out. Both houses have to pass the bill, so there is always fighting over pork barrel projects, etc. Congress can also make life painful for the services by demanding HASC and SASC hearings on their pet projects as part of their oversight role, or send CODELs or STAFFDELs out to see things first hand. A Staffdel coming to see a ship or an installation is high adventure. Remember when MG Gonsalves was withdrawn from the 3-Star list? That’s because he called the personal staffer of a member of Congress ‘sweetheart’. Like it or not, those staffers are Protocol Code 5, meaning they are a 2-star equivalents. They can also refuse to confirm nominees for appointment or promotion. Years ago the Senate refused to confirm the Air Force Major’s promotion list until the Air Force agreed to ask for a certain number of C-130s (I think they were the J model). As far as Obama appointees in the Pentagon, if there are any left that is Trump’s fault. As president he appoints every civilian senior leader in DoD, to include the SecDef and Undersecretaries, the Service Secretaries and Assistant Secretaries, and all of the uniformed Service Chiefs. Since the Republicans control the Senate with confirms such things, they can… Read more »
It’s not quite as easy to “fire” most SES personnel as you seem to believe. See
https://www.opm.gov/policy-data-oversight/senior-executive-service/reference-materials/guidesesservices.pdf
Bottom line: most SES personnel are career appointees, not political or limited/temporary appointees. It’s not particularly easy to remove career SES personnel for other than non-performance or misconduct – though they can be reassigned/detailed to another position at agency discretion provided certain rules are observed.
Further, political appointees who were SES personnel before receiving a Presidential appointee to a “Plum Book” position in general have reinstatement rights at their former agency when they leave said Presidential appointment. So while they may no longer be a Presidential appointee, some of them return to various Federal agencies as SES personnel.
Yes, they are career appointees, but they are also on a built in 2 year assignment cycle. They have to find a new job or get reinstated in their current position, or they are on the street. OPM watches this closely, and generally speaking most move on within 2-4 years. It’s very much an up or out system.
My immediate boss is an SES, and I have watched both the ring and firing process up close. It is actually easier to get rid of an SES than it is to fire a GS-12 and below.
Honestly, I don’t know why anyone would want to be an SES- the pay is good, but not much better than GS-15, and the demands are incredible.
He needs to retire. I have a feeling that Esper will say something along those lines.
Had you stopped there I’d have totally agreed with you. But making DoD “dance”? Not the same battle.
And if you think there aren’t a lot of Obama-era holdovers left in DoD, both military and civilian, I have a bridge to sell ya, cheap.
Congress can definitely make DoD dance, or sing for their supper. They have a clear authority to ask for testimony and investigate, and they can dictate funding. If you want to see a 2-3 Star get excited, tell them that a StaffDel is coming to their installation to have a look at military housing or readiness or some other hot button topic. I have personally watched a former Staff Sergeant Professional Staff Member lecture a 2-Star on training ranges.
In terms of Obama-era holdovers, if they are there, it’s because the Trump administration kept them. These are political appointments- they serve at the pleasure of the president. He doesn’t even need a reason to fire them.
SESs and GOs also serve at the pleasure of the president. Anyone with the power to determine Crozier’s future is at the 2-3 star level within the Navy Staff- no uniformed guy on the Joint Staff is going anywhere near this goat rodeo. The CNO will make a recommendation, and the SecNav (and maybe the ASNM&RA) will either endorse it or not. Ultimately Esper will have to make the call.
Having watched Esper for a while, my money is that Crozier will not be returned to command. They can’t make him retire per se (unless there are criminal charges), but they can make it clear to him that it would be best for him, his family, and the Navy if he just signed up for the next TAP Senior Seminar and headed down to Men’s Wearhouse to pick out a charcoal grey suit.
It will be interesting, either way.
Remember we’re barely 1 cycle out of the Obama administration, and a lot of the O-5/O-6 types are now flag officers.
Also keep in mind a lot of officers at that level are a little better than civilians at hiding their political leanings, or at least pretend to remain apolitical.
Then again, look at Vindman. Tell me how he lasted as long as he did.
Because he had no gag reflex.
First, officers are allowed to have political leanings- they are simply prohibited from using their office to promulgate those leanings, and are prohibited by UCMJ from using contemptuous speech toward certain elected officials.
Officers are commissioned every year. The FOGOs of today were commissioned in 1990 or so, under Reagan or Bush. The O4s/O5s of today were commissioned in 2005-2010, and started college or the military academy in 2000-2004- in other words, after the wars started. I don’t think we can question their patriotism or sense of duty simply because they were promoted to field grade rank under a democrat president.
The overwhelming majority of military officers of any branch are extremely conservative. They may not be registered for either party, but there is no doubt that most are republican leaning.
II think if you look at Vindman’s past you will find that he was very conservative. On the other hand, if you look at Trump’s past you will find that he has not always been.
“He can’t really be trusted in command at this point”
Well, he certainly can’t be trusted by the current leadership to just say “Yes sir No sir three bags full sir!” and carry out whatever BS “plans” they have.
Me, I’m still on the fence. More stuff keeps coming out and it isn’t all unfavourable to Crozier.
Crozier isn’t a hero for telling the Navy and DoD that his ship was in peril. There are channels for him to do that, and his job as skipper was to salute and implement whatever decision was made.
Instead, he chose a path, deliberately or not, that compromised the security of the nation. It’s that simple.
The Navy leadership is jacked up for not coming up with a plan to deal with this, and for basically dumping it in the laps of a jet fighter pilot that knows F*#@ All about fighting a pandemic.
I’m not sure if there was no plan, or the good Captain didn’t like the plan he was given. The end result wouldn’t have changed either way.
He’s got Medical officers on board, who, if they don’t know the answers, who they can (and should) contact BUMED, and if they don’t know, should be contacting CDC.
Meanwhile, he needs to not flip the fuck out.
According to Crozier’s Request for Assistance(?) his superiors had made it impossible to follow CDC guidelines. That was one of the reasons for his actions.
“There are channels for him to do that, and his job as skipper was to salute and implement whatever decision was made.”
He used those channels, up to and including SECNAV. As to the second, there are limits to the “Befehl ist befehl” injunction. As I mention elsewhere, I have heard it stated that it is sometimes an officer’s duty to disobey orders or otherwise seek to have them thwarted. Maybe even on this site. I have read many commenters’ condemnation of senior officers for not doing just that.
Personally, I am perfectly willing to believe that Crozier’s entire chain of command were incompetent bureaucratic hacks. My bias is that officers and senior NCOs are “guilty until proven innocent”. Anybody else here have a bias?
Not too sure why I had to get that off my chest; I blame Coronavirus quarantine.
(And OrangeManBad!, of course).
“I think there are a total of 26 warships with corona outbreaks at this point.”
There are, according to USNI, and do we know which ships with what missions and their current locations? Nope, and the reason why is that all that information is classified for national security purposes.
And that’s the crucial cat that Crozier’s actions let out of the bag on one of the most strategically significant vessels in the fleet.
He needs to go…
Oh, puhleeze. We may not know, but I am willing to bet the Chinese, Russians, and a few other interested parties know.
As for TR, I will repeat myself, that cat was let our of the bag when TR tied up at Guam and started moving infected people to medical facilities and quarantined the rest to the pier. A ship with a 4000 man crew ties up and nobody goes to the local red light district? Every civilian on Guam, including Chinese agents, knew where TR was and why.
Further, to paraphrase the first sentence of Crozier’s request for assistance(?), the TR could and would reembark the crew and set sail immediately if so ordered.
Exactly. Did we just become best friends?
No.
But, like great nations, we may have common interests. Like the US and USSR during WWII (you being the USSR, of course).
CAPT Crozier is not the lone dick-stepper in this mess, but as the commander, he gets to take the heat. The idiot that leaked the email needs his pee-pee spanked, and the command climate that led to Crozier’s action needs a thorough investigation. I do not agree with the CAPT’s actions, but apparently he felt he had no other option.
Remember the Marine Captain who sent an insecure email warning about an Afghani official who was a threat to his unit in the field. He was hammered for violating OPSEC. Maybe Squidward 🦑 can explain how that’s different than what Crozier did.
It would be useful to read the actual email sent by Crozier, which states his reason for sending it and lists the recipients.
You might also want to read the memo he signed. It goes into a good deal more detail – and yeah, IMO it crossed the line between saying “I need help” and disclosing his assessment of his ship’s readiness status. The latter (readiness status) is routinely considered classified info, particularly for large combat units.
https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/6821824-TR-COVID-19-Assistance-Request.html#document/p1
The memo is unmarked (not even FOUO, much less classified); unit readiness status info is classified. And Crozier was senior enough that he damn well should have known the info in that memo was classified and should have been marked.
From the memo:
“However, we are not at war, and therefore cannot allow a single Sailor to perish as a result of this pandemic unnecessarily.”
There’s that justification, “If it means saving even one life…” that we hear so often for justifying unwise, even illegal, action in Democrat-controlled polities, usually when they are enacting additional, restrictive gun control measures.
Forgive an old soldier if he sounds a bit heartless to some you Crozier supporters, but since when have we let that kind of liberal idealism infest our strategic planning and tactical operations?
And since when is it left to an O-6, who is not even the Carrier Strike Force commander, to determine what is the level of acceptable risk for that group? For that is precisely what Crozier did–he did not merely stand down his ship, he completely nullified the mission capability of the entire group.
What remains the major mystery here is just where did the Strike Force commander, the rear admiral, come down on Crozier’s decision? It is highly doubtful he concurred or Crozier’s relief would hardly have been possible.
“… that we hear so often for justifying unwise, even illegal, action in Democrat-controlled polities”
Not really a fair comparison. Also, one sentence taken out of context.
“And since when is it left to an O-6, who is not even the Carrier Strike Force commander, to determine what is the level of acceptable risk for that group?”
It isn’t. It is, however, part of his sworn duty to consider the level of acceptable risk for his ship. Particularly (in my opinion) in peacetime.
“What remains the major mystery here is …”
Yes indeedy. It is my guess that shall remain a mystery as long as those involved have the power to keep it that way. Now that I think about it, that may be an explanation for why Crozier chose to propagate his message as he did; we all know his reasons for doing what he did, and they do not reflect favourably on his superiors actions and “plans” (or the lack thereof).
” when have we let that kind of liberal idealism infest our strategic planning and tactical operations”
Fairly often, I would say. Idealism is supposedly what caused the founding of the US. The Civil War? I would say that was idealistic, particularly the emancipation part. Of course perhaps we differ on of “that kind”.
Read it, linked it (twice, I think).
One of the reasons officers get the big bucks is that they are sometimes called upon to choose between different courses of action none of which are desirable, may even violate regulations, and some of which may be personally damaging. I think Crozier made such a choice, knowingly and deliberately. His crew also thinks so. I respect that and will continue to do so (even if he is an officer) until further evidence changes my mind.
It seems that part of his problem is that I am reading it in the Washington Post and not SIPR/CENTRIX/whatever the Navy uses…but then again according to you Russia/China already know it all so why even make the effort?